Recent attention to the role of Indigenous knowledge (IK) in environmental monitoring, research and decision‐making is likely to attract new people to this field of work. Advancing the bringing together of IK and science in a way that is desirable to IK holders can lead to successful and inclusive research and decision‐making. We used the Delphi technique with 18 expert participants who were IK holders or working closely with IK from across the Arctic to examine the drivers of progress and limitations to the use of IK along with science to inform decision‐making related to wildlife, reindeer herding and the environment. We also used this technique to identify participants' experiences of scientists' misconceptions concerning IK. Participants had a strong focus on transformative change relating to the structure of institutions, politics, rights, involvement, power and agency over technical issues advancing or limiting progress (e.g. new technologies and language barriers). Participants identified two modes of desirable research: coproducing knowledge with scientists and autonomous Indigenous‐led research. They highlighted the need for more collaborative and coproduction projects to allow further refinement of approaches and more funding to support autonomous, Indigenous‐led research. Most misconceptions held by scientists concerning IK that were identified by participants related to the spatial, temporal and conceptual scope of IK, and the perceived need to validate IK using Western science. Our research highlights some of the issues that need to be addressed by all participants in research and decision‐making involving IK and science. While exact approaches will need to be tailored to specific social‐ecological contexts, consideration of these broader concerns revealed by our analysis are likely to be central to effective partnerships. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

The beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas, 1776)) is expected to be influenced by changes in the environment. In Nunavik, the Arctic region of Quebec, Nunavimmiut (Inuit of Nunavik) have depended on beluga for centuries, developing an extensive understanding of the species and its ecology. Forty semidirective interviews were conducted with Inuit hunters and Elders from four Nunavik communities, who had a range of 28–47 years of beluga hunting experience. Interviews followed an ethnocartographic format and were analyzed using a mixed methods approach. Hunters most commonly reported prey species from the sculpin (Cottidae), cod (Gadidae), salmon (Salmonidae), and crustacean families; regional variations in prey and in foraging habitat were found. Hunters identified significant changes in body condition (i.e., blubber thickness), which were associated with observations about the seasonality of feeding. The timing of fat accumulation in the late fall and winter coupled with the understanding that Hudson Bay is not known as a productive area suggest alternate hypotheses to feeding for the seasonal movements exhibited by these whales. Inuit Knowledge of beluga foraging ecology presented here provides information on diet composition and seasonality of energy intake of the beluga and can be an important component of monitoring diet composition for this species into the future. An Inuttitut version of the abstract is available ( Appendix A ).

This communication paper reflects on discussions from a workshop about Indigenous involvement in the peer review and editorial processes. Arctic-based research is undergoing a paradigm shift to include local Indigenous peoples, their priorities, and knowledge throughout the research process. This special issue is an excellent example; it highlights research involving partnerships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers to support knowledge co-production. Despite this shift, we find little space within the standard peer review and editorial processes for Indigenous peoples, their perspectives and knowledge. To discuss this issue, we organized a half day workshop at the 2019 ArcticNet Annual Scientific Meeting with a diversity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants who are involved in Arctic research. The discussions reveal that answering questions about the involvement of Indigenous peoples in the peer review and editorial processes largely begins by addressing the challenges of achieving equity in the research process generally. Our discussions demonstrated that further conversations are needed and that no single approach will work in all cases, but that there are several concrete actions that researchers, universities, funding organizations and publishers can take to begin addressing this issue.

In this study we systematically review and critique literature containing Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of the beluga (<em>Delphinapterus leucas</em>) as a case study to gain insights into TEK’s contributions to the marine mammal literature over the past four decades. We reviewed multiple searchable online databases, collected both academic and grey literature, and categorized it by geographic and disciplinary focus, as well as by the contribution of TEK to the source. Of the total 137 papers retained in the final analysis, 67% referred to the Canadian North, particularly the Hudson Bay subregion. Articles that included informal or anecdotal representations of TEK of belugas were the most prevalent. The number of papers containing TEK of belugas increased rapidly between 1975 and 2004 but appears to have leveled off since then. Biological papers represented the largest disciplinary focus (72%), followed by papers on management or co-management. This review showed that although knowledge of Indigenous peoples has made substantial contributions to the understanding of beluga, there is a lack of explicit collection, documentation, and use of TEK in the literature on belugas and particularly in the literature on beluga management.

No abstract